languages 1). It seems that the opinion that the Volzhekl Bulgarians really represented a mixture of Chud, Turkic and Slavic elements should be recognized as closer to the truth 2). In the question of the origin of the Bulgarians, anthropology can also provide some service. The skulls found during excavations in the ancient Bulgars turn out to be long-headed; short-headed is 20°/o, therefore the Bulgarians are a fairly pure ethnographic entity, with only a small admixture of Turkic or Slavic elements - short-headed 3). The primitive long-headed tribe, which once occupied almost the entire territory of present-day Russia, is the Greek tribe, to which the Mary and Vesi tribe belonged; in it, perhaps, the indigenous Bulgarians should also be included "). There is data that allows us to identify the language of the Volzhek Bulgars with the language of the present-day Chuvash. Thus, inscriptions were discovered on tombstones in the Bulgars, which, after examining them, turned out to be written in the Chuvali language. The shapes of the Chuvash fir trees on these tombstones represent something in between, transitional between Turkic and modern Chuvash 5). After studying the Chuvash language, it was also shown that, having a Turkic language, it contains 060% elements of non-Turkic 6).
r) The first opinion belongs to Radlov and Kunik (link earlier), the second one belongs to Vamberi in the indicated “Otzrgipe @er Maisuageo”. Failures in work® “Chuvash in everyday life, historical and religious relations” Moscow, 1865 tries to “prove that the Bulgarians are not Chuvash, but mistake the latter for Burtas, (See p. 178 et seq.), which we will talk about below. Savelyev, in “Mukhamedan Numismatics”, St. Petersburg. 1846, it seems, also recognized the Chuvash as the descendants of the Bulgarians (p. 100 et seq.). Fran too. See next. link.
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
3) Bogdanov. “Inhabitants of the ancient Bulgarians according to cranological characteristics.”
*) The present-day Hungarians, relatives, also belong to the Ugric tribe. brothers of our Voguls and Ostyaks, whose ancestors were called Yugra in our photo records. See Evropeus: “About the Ugric people who lived in central and northern Russia, in Finland and in the northern part of Scandinavia before the arrival of their current inhabitants.” Sib. 1874. For anthropological confirmation, see Bogdanov, in the articles: 1) “Prehistoric Tverites according to kurgan excavations”, 2) “Kurgan inhabitants of the SFveryan land according to excavations in Chernihiv province”, 3) “Meryans in anthropological relations”, etc.
5) Ilminsky’s letter to Grigoriev about the phonetic relations between the Chuvash and Turkic languages (in Izvfstyami. Archaeologist. Society, vol. U, pp. 80-84).
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
ry ethnographic data about the present-day Chuvash, then we must come to the firm conclusion that they are of Finecato origin; Their backgrounds, customs and morals are common to the beliefs, customs and morals of not only their neighbors, but also those of Finnish people living far away from them 1). From what has been said, it is only possible to say that once upon a time, in very distant times, a small Turkic horde appeared among the Volga Finnish-Ugric tribes, subjugated one of them to its power, settled among it, mingled with it, giving it to a large extent its ethnographic features in the form of customs and language, but and she, in turn, learned, perhaps, from this tribe some religious beliefs. The anthropological culture of the Eels has been preserved, but the language of this Greek tribe has retained only a few of its original features 2).
The center of the Volzheko-Bulgarekato Tsarotva was the darkness, where the Kama River flows into the Volga. To the north and south of the mouth of the Kama and up the river itself lay the main Bulgarian cities. Thirty versts below the confluence of the Kama River and the Volga, 6 verts from the last days, lay the capital of the Bolgarekato Tsaretva Torod Bulgar, the foundation of which is lost in the darkness of time. Most of the buildings of this town were built of wood, 3), but the remains of the buildings also indicate that there were many stone structures. This city was great and popular, thanks to its extensive cake connections, and great travel to the entire East. Currently
+) See Georgi. “Description of all the peoples living in the Russian state.” Sib. 1799, part 1, p. 35 et seq.; SOBOEV “Chuvash”, especially chapter UT, pp. 62 et seq.; Miller “Description of pagan peoples living in the Kazan province - such as Cheremis, Chuvash and Votyakov, 1743.” St. Petersburg 1791, Castren:
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]